Big screen Lombax: CG animated Ratchet & Clank movie coming in 2015

Insomniac involved in feature, but not Sony Pictures.

After starring in 13 games since their 2002 premiere on the PS2, Ratchet & Clank are making the jump to the big screen with a movie planned for a 2015 release.

The film is a coproduction of Rainmaker Entertainment, known for recent children's film Escape from Earth, and Blockade Entertainment, an animation house that specializes in video game adaptations for TV. Game developer Insomniac will be playing a "hands-on role" in the production as well, with series writer T.J. Fixman penning the script according to today's announcement. The movie will be "a retelling and re-fleshing out of the origin story" with the original series antagonist Chairman Drek as the main villain, Insomniac Community Lead James Stevenson revealed in a comment thread accompanying the announcement.

Though Ratchet & Clank games have appeared exclusively on Sony systems (and have often been heavily promoted by Sony itself), the Japanese conglomerate isn't involved in the movie through its Sony Pictures label. "The movie business is crazy at times," Insomniac Community Lead James Stevenson said in response to a question about Sony involvement. "We’re super stoked to be partnering with Rainmaker though and getting to be super hands-on."

Movies based on gaming properties have an extremely checkered past. For every relative success story like Tomb Raider or Resident Evil there are a handful of critical and box office flops ranging from Super Mario Bros. to Postal. And then there are the bevy of video game movie projects that are announced and then trapped in development hell: We're still waiting on supposed films based on Pac-Man, Asteroids, and Gears of War, not to mention the seemingly cursed Halo movie project.

Still, Ratchet & Clank would seem to have the right mix of colorful, fleshed-out characters, outer-space action, and self-aware humor to translate well to a family-friendly cinematic thrill ride. The early teaser trailer below gives us hope that this one might buck the trend and actually be a silver screen gaming adaptation worth watching.

Some series lend themselves to the big screen. Others make you scratch your head and say "How is THAT going to work?" Especially when the game is in the realm of gritty "realism" like DOOM. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be kicked in the head.

R&C is definitely the former, for me. I can see it doing well, and it may even revitalize the series (not that it has been hurting.) It's playful enough to lend itself to the family-going crowd. I know I'd love to bring my kids to a R&C movie, hopefully getting them hooked on the series.

This has massive possibility for being AWESOME. Ratchet and Clank are inherently hilarious so they have a good chance of making a great translation to the big screen. Too bad they can't get some Pixar people ob the job. That or some of the people who worked on Kung-Fu Panda.

Sigh. I think I am the only person on earth who genuinely enjoyed Super Mario Bros, and was sad that the sequel never got made. It was really cool seeing how they translated aspects of the games (mushrooms, fireballs, Bob-Bombs) into this completely bizarre, sleazy neon alternate universe storyline. Plus, it had some pretty clever plot elements for a cheesy kids movie.

Might actually work the cutscenes are better than some animated movies. If Blizzard would make a Starcraft movie it would be even better but that is the next best thing.

The fun thing is that some of the last pictures (the city) are almost indistinguishable from the level graphics of the PS3 game. We have come a long way when it comes to graphics. The games are absolutely beautiful, the gameplay can get a bit repetitive and arbitrary but it could almost be a movie itself.

Some series lend themselves to the big screen. Others make you scratch your head and say "How is THAT going to work?" Especially when the game is in the realm of gritty "realism" like DOOM. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be kicked in the head.

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark... it didn't have to be horrible. It could have been amazing.

Wait, 13 games? I count 12 counting the PSP games and the old mobile phone one..

Anyway, I hope this will be good. I really like R&C, particularly the original PS2 games, so it's cool that they're basing it loosely on the first game. I just hope it doesn't become the new canon (not that that would be too important with Ratchet & Clank) and that they don't take the lazy route for the humor (get it, dubstep is a currently popular genre of music!!) I did like that the teaser trailer was kind of in the style of "Duck Amuck" though.

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark...

Yeah, how about no? Spyro really started tanking after the second game, to the point where he faded into all but obscurity until the attempted revival (Skylanders) ended up having Spyro being outshined by the other characters. I think it's safe to say that the Spyro License is all but dead and IF they were to use it, it would likely be a Skylanders movie.

R&C will work much better.

(And it's not because I hate Skylanders. I have almost every single figure released to date, save from a couple retail exclusives. It just won't translate as well as R&C)

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark...

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark...

Some series lend themselves to the big screen. Others make you scratch your head and say "How is THAT going to work?" Especially when the game is in the realm of gritty "realism" like DOOM. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be kicked in the head.

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark... it didn't have to be horrible. It could have been amazing.

Yeah, how about no? Spyro really started tanking after the second game, to the point where he faded into all but obscurity until the attempted revival (Skylanders) ended up having Spyro being outshined by the other characters. I think it's safe to say that the Spyro License is all but dead and IF they were to use it, it would likely be a Skylanders movie.

R&C will work much better.

(And it's not because I hate Skylanders. I have almost every single figure released to date, save from a couple retail exclusives. It just won't translate as well as R&C)

I can see [Ratchet and Clank] doing well, and it may even revitalize the series (not that it has been hurting.) It's playful enough to lend itself to the family-going crowd. I know I'd love to bring my kids to a R&C movie, hopefully getting them hooked on the series.

One thing I wondered about when I read this... is this what Sony needs to help create iconic characters for its PlayStation brand? Unlike Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft lack those iconic characters that help push people toward their brand. So, imagine if Insomniac had a new entry in the Ratchet and Clank series that released a week or two after the movie? I'm not talking about those poor movie tie-ins that we get, but a whole new game. They could introduce Doctor Nefarious at the end of the movie (as the usual teaser for a sequel), and use him in the game.

Although... given Sony has no involvement in this movie venture, it sounds like they may pass up on it entirely!

Yeah, how about no? Spyro really started tanking after the second game, to the point where he faded into all but obscurity until the attempted revival (Skylanders) ended up having Spyro being outshined by the other characters. I think it's safe to say that the Spyro License is all but dead and IF they were to use it, it would likely be a Skylanders movie.

R&C will work much better.

(And it's not because I hate Skylanders. I have almost every single figure released to date, save from a couple retail exclusives. It just won't translate as well as R&C)

Though I couldn't find sales numbers for Spyro (didn't try all THAT hard) when a series starts dipping into the low 60's and 50's it's nearing "undisputably bad" territory. Again, "Skylanders" is now the IP, not "Spyro." He has been assimilated into a new franchise. As far as I've read, there's no plans to make any more non-Skylander Spyro games.

Although... given Sony has no involvement in this movie venture, it sounds like they may pass up on it entirely!

There you go answering your own questions. SONY doesn't know opportunity if it bit every exec in the ass. They play it too safe, don't take ANY risks. Using my other discussion as an example- people were very critical of Skylanders before it was released. It was a major risk Activision took, and it paid off BIG TIME.

I wouldn't be surprised if SONY rejected the idea then Insomniac went to find someone else. That's just the SONY thing to do.

Yeah, how about no? Spyro really started tanking after the second game, to the point where he faded into all but obscurity until the attempted revival (Skylanders) ended up having Spyro being outshined by the other characters. I think it's safe to say that the Spyro License is all but dead and IF they were to use it, it would likely be a Skylanders movie.

R&C will work much better.

(And it's not because I hate Skylanders. I have almost every single figure released to date, save from a couple retail exclusives. It just won't translate as well as R&C)

Though I couldn't find sales numbers for Spyro (didn't try all THAT hard) when a series starts dipping into the low 60's and 50's it's nearing "undisputably bad" territory. Again, "Skylanders" is now the IP, not "Spyro." He has been assimilated into a new franchise. As far as I've read, there's no plans to make any more non-Skylander Spyro games.

[quote="aikoukaAlthough... given Sony has no involvement in this movie venture, it sounds like they may pass up on it entirely!

There you go answering your own questions. SONY doesn't know opportunity if it bit every exec in the ass. They play it too safe, don't take ANY risks. Using my other discussion as an example- people were very critical of Skylanders before it was released. It was a major risk Activision took, and it paid off BIG TIME.

I wouldn't be surprised if SONY rejected the idea then Insomniac went to find someone else. That's just the SONY thing to do.[/quote]Spyro the Dragon: 85.44%Spyro 2: Ripto's Rage: 86.57%Spyro: Year of the Dragon: 90.59%Skylanders are in the 80%

Ratchet & Clank have better ratings on average but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking is Ratchet & Clank a more valuable franchise? I mean, I can't even think what Ratchet & Clank look like off the top of my head compared to even Jak & Dexter. Game popularity is good but what you need is brand recognition. Spyro has that coming out of its ears. Especially with the Skylanders series moving like hotcakes.

Some series lend themselves to the big screen. Others make you scratch your head and say "How is THAT going to work?" Especially when the game is in the realm of gritty "realism" like DOOM. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be kicked in the head.

R&C is definitely the former, for me. I can see it doing well, and it may even revitalize the series (not that it has been hurting.) It's playful enough to lend itself to the family-going crowd. I know I'd love to bring my kids to a R&C movie, hopefully getting them hooked on the series.

Doom would have been just fine if the folks behind the film had just kept to the insanely simple plot and pacing of the Doom series - you're a badass space marine kicking the crap out of demons from Hell invading our dimension thanks to some stupid military weapon experiments (that's it!). That fewer rounds were squeezed off in the Doom movie than I used in the very first level of the shareware Doom on DOS is also a big part of that films failure. Doom was never meant to be an atmospheric slow paced suspense thriller. Doom has always been a balls out action series punctuated by heavy doses of violence, dark humor, and gore. Even Doom 3, though skimping on the imp hordes, was still heavily steeped in action for all but a limited few cut scenes and the very beginning of new levels. There's very little time in Doom 3 where you aren't shooting something.

Watch Outpost and tell me that old iD properties can't be successfully adapted for the screen. I couldn't help but think of iD's old 3D version of Castle Wolfenstein while watching this flick. Apparently there's also a sequel I'll have to check out.

It all boils down to how respectfully the source material is treated. And yeah, to some degree certain properties just wouldn't make great films (I'm still desperately trying to imagine how Pac-Man will work). Just like a poor adaption of a novel will drive fans of the source insane. A poor adaption of a game/game series upsets fans of that source material. And for some reason film makers seem to place little importance on being faithful to the products they're adapting from the gaming world, save for a few exceptions.

If they find a way to work into the movie Captain Qwark's theater scene from Secret Agent Clank, I will pay for myself and any of my friends to go see it. That might be my all-time favorite bit of video game cinematography.

Ratchet & Clank have better ratings on average but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking is Ratchet & Clank a more valuable franchise? I mean, I can't even think what Ratchet & Clank look like off the top of my head compared to even Jak & Dexter. Game popularity is good but what you need is brand recognition. Spyro has that coming out of its ears. Especially with the Skylanders series moving like hotcakes.

That's why I asked if they couldn't afford Spyro.

Because the Spyro IP is dead, largely due to the fact taht just about nobody liked any Spyro game since 2-3. It may be recognisable. So is Mega Man, but that doesn't change that, whether we like it or not, CAPCOM has killed Mega Man. They've killed Spyro too. Now he's more like a cameo than an actual existing, running IP.

Some series lend themselves to the big screen. Others make you scratch your head and say "How is THAT going to work?" Especially when the game is in the realm of gritty "realism" like DOOM. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be kicked in the head.

R&C is definitely the former, for me. I can see it doing well, and it may even revitalize the series (not that it has been hurting.) It's playful enough to lend itself to the family-going crowd. I know I'd love to bring my kids to a R&C movie, hopefully getting them hooked on the series.

Doom would have been just fine if the folks behind the film had just kept to the insanely simple plot and pacing of the Doom series - you're a badass space marine kicking the crap out of demons from Hell invading our dimension thanks to some stupid military weapon experiments (that's it!). That fewer rounds were squeezed off in the Doom movie than I used in the very first level of the shareware Doom on DOS is also a big part of that films failure. Doom was never meant to be an atmospheric slow paced suspense thriller. Doom has always been a balls out action series punctuated by heavy doses of violence, dark humor, and gore. Even Doom 3, though skimping on the imp hordes, was still heavily steeped in action for all but a limited few cut scenes and the very beginning of new levels. There's very little time in Doom 3 where you aren't shooting something.

I think the fans would've liked DOOM in that fashion more, no doubt. But as far as wide range appeal it'd still be a generic action movie to most moviegoers. I was comparing it to this which is an opportunity to GROW a franchise, instead of milk it for fanservice.

Spyro the Dragon: 85.44%Spyro 2: Ripto's Rage: 86.57%Spyro: Year of the Dragon: 90.59%Skylanders are in the 80%

Ratchet & Clank have better ratings on average but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking is Ratchet & Clank a more valuable franchise? I mean, I can't even think what Ratchet & Clank look like off the top of my head compared to even Jak & Dexter. Game popularity is good but what you need is brand recognition. Spyro has that coming out of its ears. Especially with the Skylanders series moving like hotcakes.

That's why I asked if they couldn't afford Spyro.

One franchise is still making games. The other got completely absorbed into another separate franchise that isn't even exclusive to Sony boxes anymore, AND it's no longer even the focus of the new series. Do you REALLY have to ask which property is more valuable?

Except for Skylanders (which is not a Spyro game, but rather a game that has Spyro in it), you may want to look at the release dates of those highly rated Spyro games. The most recent one was in 2000. That should tell you all you need to know about how the franchise has fared recently.

Another thing you may want to look at is the developer of those good Spyro games. *Hint hint* It's Insomniac Games, the company that makes Ratchet & Clank now. Literally the second that Insomniac stopped making Spyro was the time the franchise went off a cliff. Seriously, the first game to come out after Year of the Dragon was Enter the Dragonfly in 2002, and it garnered a whopping 56% on the PS2 and 48% on the Gamecube.

Doom had a wealth of potential. If it had been handed to, say, Ridley Scott and Id had been more thoroughly consulted, things would have been.. well much much different. Martian bases, corporate corruption, portals to hell, demons, terror in the dark... it didn't have to be horrible. It could have been amazing.

Alien/Bladerunner Ridley Scott or Prometheus Ridley Scott? They are not equivalent.

Kyle Orland / Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area.